Presence and IntComm WG

[Candace Holman <>]

Jeremy,

Here's a few presence use cases based on special-purpose wearable locator 
devices.

Mom, Dad, and daughter enter the local mall and split up immediately as 
usual.  But this time each leases a keychain locator device from the mall's 
information desk before parting ways.  An operator links these three 
devices in the program database.  When daughter needs a little cash, she 
looks to see whether Mom or Dad is closer, and makes a beeline to the 
nearest one.  When Mom wants to make sure daughter stays out of the arcade, 
she periodically monitors her location, as daughter is well aware.  When 
Dad decides it's time to go but has lost sight of Mom or daughter, he uses 
the display to find them.

Same idea for a department store - but all parent/child groups are tagged 
as they enter the store.  Not only can the parents locate a lost child, but 
the store can also keep statistics on which departments have the most 
attendance, and provide a way for customers to page a store attendant to 
answer a product question in  a particular department 
location.  Unfortunately, a careless implementation would allow 
unscrupulous persons to wait until the children were far from parents and 
use the opportunity to remove the locator device and abduct the 
child.  Privacy is an issue even when location detection is amenable.

A search party covering a huge area of woods is trying to coordinate its 
efforts to quickly search every square meter.  An electronic map is pulled 
up and divided on a central station.  Each searcher wears a locator device 
that coordinates with a map update point.  A monitor can periodically 
redistribute people to under-populated areas to get better coverage, or 
send a cluster of nearby searchers to an area that suddenly provides a clue 
that narrows the search.

A shepherd is trying to mow his lawn using a herd of sheep.  In order to 
properly distribute the mowing action he tags each sheep, sits back with a 
glass of lemonade, and trains his dogs to read the ... just kidding.

Best,
Candace

At 02:14 PM 1/9/2004, you wrote:

> All,
>
>   There were two agenda items yesterday that we didn't get around to.
> One is feedback mechanisms and the other is use cases.  I'd like to get
> them started even if we don't have time for discussion until after JT.
>
>   I think it's interesting to consider that it may never have
> occured before, ever, that we have more technology options today
> for communications than people know what to do with them.  For the
> first time the relevant question isn't how can a particular new
> technology be used, it's how do you people want to communicate given
> many degrees of technological freedom?  That, of course, is the reason
> for paths-in-the-snow and the need for feedback mechanisms for the PIC
> group's work.
>
>   I can think of three methods: questionaires at conference demos, a
> roadshow demo in a box that can be sent to members along with a request
> for more freeform feedback and semi-permanent experimental implementations
> with a controlled user group.  I'm not hopeful that the first is going
> to get us anywhere (although we should still try.)  The second might have
> value in getting the PIC message out but I'm not sure about getting good
> feedback.  The last seems to me our best shot.  Thoughts?  Other ideas?
>
>   Secondly, the concepts of PIC and ALS are so new that many people seem
> to have difficulty seeing beyond the negative potential for big brother
> like surveillance.  It might be useful for us to develop use cases
> for the web site.  Four brief examples follow.  I have a deely-bopper
> equipped headset for a prize to the most creative use case anyone would
> like to submit.
>
>   A field engineer has left an expensive piece of equipment at a customer
> site.  She tells her location assistant (a piece of software on her PDA)
> to remind her when she is within 10 blocks of the site.  Two days later
> her PDA buzzes and announces the site is three blocks away.  The engineer
> makes a short, efficient side trip and retrieves the equipment.
>
>   An executive wants to schedule a conference call with three colleagues
> whose schedules are rarely free at the same time.  He tells his location
> assistant to execute a “conference pounce” when all four of the
> necessary participants are 1) not in a meeting, 2) in their offices and
> 3) not already on the phone.  The location assistant checks everyone's
> on line calendars for possible times.  During those times it looks to
> see where the participants are.  When the time comes that all phones are
> unhook the location agent rings all phones and announces the conference.
>
>   A freshman is in the library desperately trying to decipher an
> assignment from her English professor.  She consults her location
> assistant and requests it find all students within 100 feet of her
> current location filtered by the attributes "freshman AND English101 AND
> Dr. Obscure".  She discovers a classmate two tables away.  After a brief
> instant message exchange the two freshman collaborate.  Note that even
> if together these two freshman do not resolve their problem, location
> services have rendered what is often a forbidding environment friendly.
>
>   It is 1:30 in the afternoon and a traveler is getting hungry but can't
> see a restaurant.  He asks his location agent for the location of the
> nearest pizza restaurant.  This is actually a more difficult question
> than it may seem.  The nearest restaurant in geospatial terms could be
> across a canal where the nearest bridge is a mile away.  The location
> agent would need to understand distance in human meaningful terms.
> Fortunately, it does and the traveler eats.
>
> - Jeremy
>
> --